2. The costs of the lawsuit, including the part resulting from the supplementary participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

A. The Plaintiff is a company established around October 16, 1971, which ordinarily employs approximately 150 workers and operates passenger transport business through taxi operation.

On February 28, 2007, the intervenor was a person who was employed by the plaintiff and was engaged in taxi driving, and was employed as a vice-chairperson of the National taxi industry trade union A branch of the plaintiff's workplace (hereinafter "the labor union of this case").

나. 원고는 2015. 11. 10. ‘㉮ 회사의 정당한 지시 위반 및 무단결근, ㉯ 운수사업법 위반으로 행정처분, ㉰ 유언비어허위 사실 유포로 회사 명예 실추훼손 및 노노노사 갈등분열 조장획책, ㉱ 업무 방해, ㉲ 제3자 개입 근로자 선전선동 및 불안감 조성, ㉳ 기타’를 징계 사유로 적시하여 원고에 대하여 징계위원회를 개최하였고, 그 징계위원회에서 ‘해고’를 의결하였다.

Accordingly, on November 11, 2015, the Plaintiff notified the intervenors that “the Intervenor will be dismissed on the grounds of disciplinary action as above based on Articles 19, 20, 22, 26, 39, 40, 41, 42, and 64 of the Rules of Employment, and Articles 22, 23, 24, and 25 of the collective agreement.”

The Intervenor filed a petition for review on November 13, 2015, but the Plaintiff, following the Review and Disciplinary Committee, notified the Plaintiff on November 27, 2015 that he/she would be equally determined as “a dismissal.”

(hereinafter referred to as “instant dismissal”) dismissal made through the aforementioned series of processes.

On November 24, 2015, the Intervenor filed an application for remedy for unfair dismissal with the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission (Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission) No. 2015da2959 on November 24, 2015.

On January 18, 2016, the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission(Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission), which is recognized as a ground for disciplinary action against the intervenor, but dismissed the intervenor on this ground, compared to the degree of the misconduct.